Jump to content

US Politics: What goes up, must come down!


Fragile Bird

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Ha. In our new Utopia, there is no such thing as "election day"

As usual, Terry Pratchett said it best:

"The Patrician believed in One Man, One Vote. He was the man, he had the vote."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our mayor addressed us, and now is taking Q&A with the City health department team. It's both informative and reassuring.He repeated his address in Spanish.

The most reassuring thing is telling us that he / our City began taking precautions at the airports and in other ways, and started to prepare 'in case,' at the start of January. Quite a few tests have been conducted -- medical communities, education communities and the population have been following instructions and cooperating particularly with when suspicious about ourselves or family members, getting tested. So far there are no cases of covin-19 in NYC, but that inevitably will change.

Another reassuring point is that there are already facilities prepared with 1700 beds for treatment and isolation. Even better, if one has no health insurance, if one can't get to a doctor, and fears one may have the infection, there are numbers and emails available and the City will send someone to you and take you to where you can be checked and isolated, if necessary.

One does wish we could have this kind of leadership nationally. 

~~~~~~~~~~

South Carolina rethugs are organized by Tea Party members to vote for Bernie in that state's open primary.  As in past primaries and elections elsewhere, it is called Operation Chaos, though the woman who began Operation Chaos denies that this is the purpose; the purpose is to open all primaries, while most of the open primary states and others have just canceled having rethug primaries at all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

 

@Fragile Bird sort of silly to have a holiday to allow to do something that is no longer relevant, no? 

 

28 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Ha. In our new Utopia, there is no such thing as "election day"

Don’t you realize every despot holds elections?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Liffguard said:

I understand the "despot" discussion is not meant particularly seriously, but I kind of want to air some thoughts on the topic any way. I think that in many ways, a benevolent climate-preserving dictator is not just unlikely, the concept contains a fundamental logical contradiction. The reason the climate crisis is so intractable at the moment is because any viable solutions will require major social and economic changes, in a way that will massively reduce the wealth and power of the most powerful people and institutions in the world. They don't want that, so those changes don't happen.

So where does our climate saviour despot get their power to enact these changes from? Not from those who already have it, they would resist. The only way for someone like that to gain power is through a mass popular movement. And if we have a mass popular movement, then there's no need for a despot, we can make the changes democratically (meaning not necessarily through existing political institutions, but with democratic support).

Of course, the danger is that a popular movement could just as easily be a reactionary nationalist movement as a progressive socialist one. Ecofascism is something we should all be very concerned about.

The only way the climate crisis will be genuinely tackled is through a popular movement. But we need to be very careful about what form that movement takes.

The popular movement will be from low ground to higher ground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Why does Warren only have 20% support in Mass? Seems weird to me that she and Sanders together are about 40% in a super liberal state.

You ever been to Boston, brah? They're Democrat. They are not liberal. Something certain rabid minded individuals seem incapable of grasping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I lived in Cambridge for three years; perhaps what you say is true of all the rest of Boston but the 14ish universities there should lead to a pretty liberal environment.

Have you not followed the bits about young people not voting? It's been the filler for all the Despotism talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Insufficient imagination here.  The Monday after the Superb Owl would be a national holiday under my benevolent* reign.  Panem et circenses, baybee.

 

*Benevolence defined by reference by what could be rather than what is.  Applies only to those who agree with me. Cannot be combined with any other offer.  Prices and terms subject to change.

Pretty sure in terms of state building, Rawls' veil of ignorance & justice as fairness is still en vogue.  Be happy to oversee that provess, but I'm fairly confident everybody under the veil will agree that both the day of and the day after the Super Bowl will be national holidays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

You don't any of that with certainty, yet you keep stating it as if it's cast in stone and should be everyone's foregone conclusion.

On the Eve of the 2016 GE did your crystal ball tell you Trump would beat Hillary? I doubt it, you were likely as fooled as everyone else.

We are still way too far out to say with any certainty who will win the November election and the down ballot races. 2016 taught us the msm general consensus should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially the "Sky is falling/Chris Matthews" type of prognosticators.

You are right. Nothing is certain. Anything can happen. Though forgive me for not being relieved at the idea that "all we need to hope for is another highly improbable result in order to be saved!".

He is still an idiot for refusing Bloomberg's money. He still risks all of the things I stated above. He is not playing to win. He is still likely to lose. 

There is good news though. He is still lily white pure to the California woke crowd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Mass is weird liberal, like most of the northeast.  They even have a republican governor.  

Nah. It's that Mass is liberal, not leftist. It's full of guys named Will who've been in a union for 30 years and always vote Democratic because of working class solidarity and because growing up their parents loved Jackie Kennedy. But they've got no time whatsoever for the ideas the geeks in Cambridge come up with.

There are some leftists, especially out in the college towns in the western part of the state, but not really that many overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

1.  There will be at least 1 national holiday each month under my reign.  However, the first two days of March Madness can only be a holiday if Duke is in the tournament.  

Acceptable. However, Duke chokes a lot, so if they lose on the first Thursday, we still get the Friday off, right?

Quote

2.  Fountains of it.  Will likely be flat and Coors Light.  Am open to approaches from Budweiser.

(statement made at court)

“All hail Dear Leader MZ!”

(statements made in private down by the docks)

“Once the coup is complete, we throw the body in a river of Stella.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

You are right. Nothing is certain. Anything can happen. Though forgive me for not being relieved at the idea that "all we need to hope for is another highly improbable result in order to be saved!".

He is still an idiot for refusing Bloomberg's money. He still risks all of the things I stated above. He is not playing to win. He is still likely to lose. 

There is good news though. He is still lily white pure to the California woke crowd. 

He's no idiot. He understands that his movement is entirely based on truth between himself and the members of the movement. That trust was first established because he refused big donations from big donors that might imply he owes something to them. I'm confused about your reaction to this, because Sanders consistently attacks big money donations that potentially weds a candidate to the oligarchy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Just heard two hilarious things about Trump. Not, mind you, funny ha-ha.

A group of Americans on the Diamond Princess, some with Covid-19, were brought back to the US and are in quarantine at a special facility. Apparently Trump was absolutely livid that they were allowed to return to the US. He is considering appointing a special czar to deal with the virus, because his head of whatever you guys call health obviously can't, he brought those people back without checking with Trump first! Somebody should make a campaign ad about that. Or at least some memes. Or a New Yorker cartoon.

The second thing that Trump is very very angry about is the fact that the stock market has been falling. I kid you not. How dare investors be worried that profits of companies might fall because their supply chains have been disrupted!

That, if nothing else, proves that Trump is not a businessman. A real estate developer is a different creature altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

He's no idiot. He understands that his movement is entirely based on truth between himself and the members of the movement. That trust was first established because he refused big donations from big donors that might imply he owes something to them. I'm confused about your reaction to this, because Sanders consistently attacks big money donations that potentially weds a candidate to the oligarchy. 

Because it's not a donation. Sanders wouldn't control it or deal with it at all. It's literally Bloomberg funding his own PAC and doing his own thing with it. 

And Sanders said 'nope'. Not any nuanced statement about how he doesn't control what Bloomberg does with his money and that if Bloomberg wants to support our cause, feel free - but I won't change a single word! No encouragement of him spending money on downballot races. Or anything about 'he doesn't have to support me, but feel free to attack Trump'. No, it's just a flat out 'will not take someone willing to spend a billion dollars to ensure Trump isn't re-elected.'

It is remarkable how Republicans have somehow maneuvered Dems into accepting that money in politics is horrible, and then proceed to outspend them absurdly and get massive influence. "No, sorry, queens are clearly overpowered and you shouldn't use those ever in chess". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how bona fide is bloomberg's offer? it's not like the cappies are wanting a leftwing president. 

bloomberg knew it would be rejected, so he can make the offer with no risk of funding a lefty.  and sanders can predict that bloomberg might spend a ton of anti-trump money anyway--so he risks very little in rejecting the funds.  they both get to maintain a certain purity while working together against the far right.  this seems fairly obvious?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...